Military Review

Barge haulers in orbit

60
Can Russia catch up with the USSR in developing reusable space systems?


Today, in order to live well and safely, it is necessary to have dominance in the third dimension, or at least not to yield to others here. The basis of this is the ability to deliver, in the shortest possible time and to the right place, warheads, weapons, manpower, and in peacetime to ensure the free movement of the population, goods and cargo both within the country and abroad. This is achieved with the help of the military aviation, space rocket, aerospace systems and civil aviation.

This is well understood in the USA, Great Britain, European states, and the PRC. In the leadership of Russia, there is a complete understanding of the importance of the first two components and a clearly insufficient awareness of the significance of the two latter. Let us dwell in more detail on the advantages of aerospace systems.

Barge haulers in orbitFrom the territory of Russia we cannot launch satellites into space with any orbital inclination we need. This is predetermined by the geographical location of the country. Let me remind you that the inclination of the orbit of a satellite of the Earth is the angle defined by the planes, one of which contains this orbit, and the other - the equator. It is impossible to immediately set the satellite inclination less than the latitude from which the launch is made. Even the Eastern Cosmodrome will not help here. The most southerly point of the RF is 41 ° 11's. sh. And one of the most important for the practical application of the orbits is the geostationary, passing in the equatorial plane of the Earth (0 ° latitude). The change in inclination is a very energy-consuming maneuver. So, for low-orbit satellites having an orbital speed of the order of 8 kilometers per second, a change in inclination by 45 degrees will require approximately the same energy (speed increments) as for launching into orbit - about 8 kilometers per second. For comparison: the energy capabilities of the Space Shuttle allowed for full use of onboard fuel (about 22 tons: 8174 kg of fuel and 13 486 kg of oxidizer in orbital maneuvering engines) to change the value of orbital speed of only 300 meters per second, respectively maneuver in a low circular orbit) - approximately two degrees. When launching geostationary satellites from high-latitude cosmodromes (Baikonur, Vostochny), they are initially displayed in a low reference orbit, after which several intermediate, higher ones are sequentially formed. The required energy costs are still quite large.

All this was well known from the very beginning of astronautics.

A carrier aircraft, when solving the problem of launching a satellite into a geostationary orbit, can deliver a second rocket stage to equatorial latitude. At current prices, the gains from using a system with a mobile aviation launch amount to several tens of millions of dollars.

The most important feature of the aerospace system is the efficiency of the task of meeting with another object in orbit. Traditional vertically launched removal vehicles have significant temporary phasing loss. This, I recall, the maneuver of the spacecraft, performed during the approach and docking of two spacecraft. Systems with a mobile aviation launch can reduce the phasing time to the orbital period by maneuvering the aircraft carrier. This, combined with advanced capabilities in the geographical latitude of the launch, provides an effective solution to the tasks of emergency rescue of crews of manned vehicles, inspection of space objects, and rapid replenishment of a low-orbit satellite constellation.

The use of an aircraft carrier allows second-stage launches at a large distance from the home airfield. Thus, when launching 51 ° into orbit, an aerospace complex, starting from Akhtubinsk, Engels or Orenburg, can fly to the Baikonur area and, without landing, launch the second stage along the route of launching missile systems. When basing in the area of ​​Omsk or Novosibirsk, access to this route is carried out only over the territory of Russia.

Another advantage of aerospace systems is that there is no need for expensive space centers, as well as in huge fields (and forests) of alienation, where the poisonous remnants of the first steps fall. To start and land enough airfields, which are already available in LII them. Gromov and Baikonur (created under the landing of "Buran" system "Energy" - "Buran", is still the highest achievement among the world systems of launching into space). It is advisable to build the same lane at the Vostochny cosmodrome.

Taxi is not for everyone


Aerospace systems are actively developing in the United States.

In recent years, Space Ship One and Space Ship Two suborbital aerospace systems have been developed for space tourism. The first has already made several flights. The White Knight Two carrier aircraft with a suborbital Space Ship Two with two pilots also performed a series of test launches in normal mode. Excellent stability and controllability have been demonstrated. Despite the Space ShipT wo disaster in October of 2014, co-owner of the Virgin Galactic company developing a suborbital plane, British billionaire Richard Branson said the company would continue to work.

From 1999, first commissioned by NASA, and then by the US Department of Defense, Boeing has been developing the reusable winged spacecraft X-37В. Launching into orbit is being done by the Atlas-5 rocket (produced by the United Launch alliance, formed jointly by Lockheed and Boeing, and uses a Russian-made RD-180 engine). The first orbital flight ended with a successful landing at the airfield of the US Air Force Base "Vandenberg". Details of the mission, which lasted 469 days, are not disclosed. The device was in orbit inaccessible for observation by Russian means of aerospace defense. Trials continue. X-37B may be the prototype of the future satellite space interceptor. But it is possible that he will be able to deliver rocket-bomb strikes from orbit, while remaining completely invisible to our missile attack warning systems. Some sources claim: the goal of the program is to give the Pentagon weaponwith which it would be possible to deliver quick and accurate non-nuclear strikes on any target on the planet in response to threats to the national security of the United States. "

In December, 2011 in the United States hosted a presentation of the project of the new aerospace transport system Stratolaunch Systems, representing the further development of the concept implemented by designer Bert Rutan in Space Ship One and Space Ship Two. Finances the work of the company Stratolaunch Systems partner B. Gates in the creation of Microsoft Paul Allen. The entire system consists of three components: a carrier from Scaled Composites, which will be the largest in stories by plane, a multistage rocket produced by Space Exploration Technologies and a system from Dynetics, which allows you to safely carry a rocket weighing 222 tons. If everything goes according to plan, then its first launch can take place in the 2016 year. The aircraft is equipped with six engines, which are installed on the "Boeing 747". Take-off weight - tons of tons. Wingspan - 544 meters. Takeoff and landing will require a runway length of 116 kilometers. Stratolaunch Systems is a middle class hatching system, the payload is 3,7 tons. It can be just the device type X-6,1В. In this case, you get a complex with a high degree of reusable use of components, high efficiency and low cost of operation. The carrier aircraft can be used as a transport aircraft, and after completion it can be used as a passenger one.

In November, 2013 began flight tests of the Dream Chaser space taxi. Test flight was generally normal. NASA plans to use mini shuttles to replace astronauts on the ISS. Americans are attracted by the relative cheapness of such a project compared to the use of the Russian "Unions". The ship is designed to deliver cargo to low-Earth orbit and crews of up to seven people. Developed by his American private corporation Sierra Nevada. Three such ships have already been made. It was planned that the space taxi will start to fly to the ISS in 2015. It can be launched from a carrier aircraft for Stratolaunch Systems.

Mriya is a dream again


And what about us?

The development of the aerospace system "Spiral" was launched in 1964-m. It consisted of an orbital plane, which, according to the air launch technology, was to be launched into space by a hypersonic spreader aircraft, developing a speed of up to six Mach (and then a rocket stage into orbit). The latter was supposed to be used as a passenger airliner, which, of course, looked rational: its characteristics would allow raising the speed of civil aviation. The system was developed in the Mikoyan Design Bureau. The chief designer was G. E. Lozino-Lozinsky, later the chief designer of the NPO Molniya, which created the Buran aerospace vehicle. At the 40-th Congress of the International Aviation Federation (FAI), held in 1989, in Malaga (Spain), NASA representatives gave the spreader the highest rating, noting that it was designed in accordance with modern requirements. Compare it with Dream Chaser and, as suggested in the well-known children's game, find ten differences. Launched under the Buran program, the BOR-4 spacecraft was an unmanned experimental vehicle, a reduced copy of the Spiral orbital plane on the 1: 2 scale. Own work on the Spiral (except for BOR analogues) was finally stopped after the start of a large-scale, less technologically risky, seemingly more promising and in many respects repeating the American program of the Space Shuttle of the Energy project - Buran.

About the latter there are plenty of available information. Therefore, without dwelling on it, I will proceed to the next project of G. E. Lozino-Lozinsky - the MAKS multipurpose aerospace system. It was formed as a result of the successive design research carried out under his leadership as the general designer of NPO Molniya, together with related companies, branch research institutes and institutes of the Russian Academy of Sciences from the end of 70 to the present. The project received a gold medal and a special prize from the Belgian Prime Minister at 1994 in Brussels at the World Salon of Inventions, Research and Industrial Innovations.

The first stage is the super heavy transport An-1988 Mriya created in 225 under the Energy - Buran program. The second stage can be performed in three versions:

-MAX-OS with orbital plane and disposable tank;
-MAX-M with unmanned aircraft;
-MAX-T with a one-time unmanned second stage and a load of up to 18 tons.

The cost of removing cargo into low near-earth orbit is on the order of 1000 dollars per kilogram. For comparison: the average cost of removal is currently around 12 000 – 15 000, for conversion PH “Dnepr” - 3500 dollars per kilogram The advantage is less toxic fuel (in a three-component RD-701 engine - kerosene / hydrogen + oxygen) there is a great ecological cleanliness.

In versions of MAKS-OS with an orbital plane and a disposable tank, the payload put into low orbit is 7 tons, in MAKS-T - 18 tons. The starting mass of the system is 275 tons.

All possibilities to create an analogue of “Mriya” in Russia are available even without the Antonov ASTC. Such a plane in the transport version could be used as a cargo. This includes solving the issue of delivering Far Eastern fishery products to the central part of the country with freezing during transportation at an altitude of 10 thousands of meters at an outdoor temperature of 50 degrees without any refrigerators, as well as for transporting sea containers from Europe to Asia and back. The entire fuselage, except the cockpit, may be leaky. Such a modified carrier is transformed into PAK DA, which would significantly reduce the cost of its project.

For a long time, we were ahead of the rest of the world in creating multi-purpose aerospace systems. Even the Americans did not conduct as much research and flight tests as they did in the aerospace industry of our country. The collaborators of G. E. Lozino-Lozinsky, who created the Buran with the ISS together with him and under his leadership, are still bearers of invaluable experience. But time is inexorable and every day they are getting smaller. And with them go and our ability to create such systems in the foreseeable future.

Competitors in the meantime do not stand still. Doesn't anything remind you of the French VEHRA aerospace system project based on the A-380 carrier aircraft?

The system "Energy" - "Buran" in its capabilities significantly exceeded the American "Space Shuttle". And it’s not the fault of our scientists, designers, production workers that the former notable assistant to combiner Gorbachev, in order not to upset his comrades in the collapse of the USSR, Mr. Reagan and Mrs. Thatcher, immediately after the first successful launch of Buran, covered this most important aerospace program of the country.

Unnecessary "Lightning"


And we have created a unique base for ground and flight tests in both the relevant research institutes and the experimental design bureau of industry, and in the Ministry of Defense. How we manage this inherited site, I will tell you just by one example.

None of the aircraft industry design bureau, and I was at all, could not be compared with NPO Molniya for technical equipment, equipment and bench base. The flight and landing of the Buran required the modeling of a huge range of heights and speeds, heating of the surface when the vehicle entered the dense atmosphere, simultaneous exposure to vacuum, radiation and other factors of outer space. The orbital ship and all its units were tested under conditions that most accurately simulate real ones: from mechanical, thermal or acoustic loads to the effects of radiation from the sun and planets. The experimental base of NPO Molniya allowed all this. Laboratories of static strength, dynamic, tribological, vibroacoustic and thermal vacuum, cryothermic vacuum, climatic and gas-dynamic tests, as well as testing for electromagnetic compatibility and non-destructive testing were created. Listing stands NPO "Lightning" may take more than one page. Colossal, large funds were invested in the project than in the Northern and Southern pipelines. Of course, much has now been ruined, especially in recent years, by a flock of constantly changing “efficient” managers, but much of the booths and laboratories can still be restored and tested on aerospace equipment. For flight studies on the balance of NPO "Lightning" were specially equipped laboratory aircraft, designed and flying into space orbital models and full-size counterparts of "Buran", designed to study numerous flight regimes, including non-motorized descent and landing. Almost all of this unique technique has been sold by successive teams of NGO leaders. But the Lightning itself didn’t hurt anything. But the money only from the sale of the BTS-002, which flew in LII them. M. M. Gromov, the famous "wolf pack" test pilot cosmonaut Igor Wolf, would be enough to more than cover all the artificially organized debts of this enterprise. For some reason, neither the Prosecutor's Office of the Russian Federation, the Investigation Committee, nor the FSB were interested in the grounds on which this object, created with state funds, was sold to the Museum of Technology of the City of Speyer (Germany) for 20 million euros. And where did this money evaporate, which did not reach OAO NPO Molniya?

Now the company is in the process of bankruptcy and in its place margarine kings from the Saratov firm “Bouquet” are going to organize a greenhouse of trade and entertainment complexes. This is really a “bouquet” on the grave of the Russian aerospace industry. But maybe, a unique, unparalleled in the world, which at one time cost the country more than one billion dollars in an experimental base for testing airplanes, rockets and spacecraft, is it still useful to someone? Moreover, the money needed to end a bankruptcy is ridiculous compared to its true value.

Under the direction of the same G. E. Lozino-Lozinsky, on the basis of the supersonic MiG-31 interceptor, the chief designer of which he was, in 1998, work was carried out to create an aerospace light-launch system. The MiG-31 is capable of reaching 17 kilometers per hour at altitudes over 3000 kilometers and launching a reusable suborbital machine, orbiter with two cosmonauts, or a satellite weighing about 500 kilograms. In 2000-x, former employees of Deutsche Airbas turned to us with the idea of ​​sending six space tourists on the suborbital plane, similar to Space Ship Two, to the stratosphere with the MiG-31. But in the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation this project was not supported.

Interesting aerospace systems were developed in the ASTC. A. N. Tupolev. These are the Skif projects based on the Tu-22М3 and Burlak carrier aircraft on the Tu-160. However, as soon as they started, these projects, alas, did not receive further development.

From the history of the question


“January 13 The 1962 of the year at the military-scientific conference of the Air Force with the participation of Grechko, Zakharov, Baghramian, Vershinin and Kamanin decided to develop and create:

1. An aerospace plane with an altitude of 60 – 150 kilometers and an orbital space plane with an altitude 1000 – 3000 kilometers;

2. The carrier aircraft for launching spacecraft and air-to-space and space-to-ground missiles from it.

In 1962, Bolkhovitinov argued about the large economic and military advantage of orbital planes over ballistic missiles proved by calculations for action on strategic unobtrusive targets (submarines, strategic missiles in mines, etc.). To defeat each of these targets, instead of nine missiles, only two orbital planes are needed.

A very harmful directive was issued by the Minister of Defense Malinovsky on the division of functions between artillery-rocket forces and the Air Force. A commission was established to transfer facilities from the Air Force to the missile forces.

Malinovsky, Grechko and Zakharov thwarted the possibility of the advantages of the USSR in military space.

There are no collegial decisions in the country. ”
Author:
Originator:
http://vpk-news.ru/articles/28909
60 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Shirts
    Shirts 31 January 2016 06: 09 New
    +7
    It turns out that in vain we poher Burana sad
    1. Scraptor
      Scraptor 31 January 2016 07: 19 New
      +3
      Yeah, and the MiG-105, which were to be withdrawn in pairs by one R-7 (or any other suitable for manned launches with a carrier rocket) and hunt for AUG anywhere in the world. By the way, the Americans from the top of the three-fly SR-71s got tired of launching their D-21s and began to do it from under the wing of subsonic B-52s, so there are fewer stories about the Spiral.
      Separation of stages 1 and 2 occurs at much lower speeds than 6 Machs (usually around 4,5).
      1. Sakmagon
        Sakmagon 31 January 2016 10: 02 New
        +4
        Aw, how all is bad, all is wasted ...
        Again, the American "planned" and "passed the presentation" is much better than our really flying and the same Americans transporting equipment, spaceports under construction, programs in full swing ...
        The whole of Europe works for us, we bathe in the funds of the IMF and world banks of the highest categories, we have at our disposal all the resources of our satellites, and we still can’t do anything ... Dumb, probably ... request
        1. user
          user 31 January 2016 18: 00 New
          +3
          For a long period we were ahead of the rest in the creation of multi-purpose aerospace systems.


          And on all channels, all interviews, all our leaders of the space industry say "we do not need a heavy rocket, there are simply no tasks for it."
          Here you have the whole answer and the whole prospect.
          1. mervino2007
            mervino2007 1 February 2016 01: 14 New
            0
            Quote: user
            our leaders in the space industry say "we don't need a heavy-class rocket, there are simply no tasks for it"

            The failure to create space technology is terrible. Space executives chirped about moon exploration, seemingly lit up by the Chinese idea. The backlogs of the USSR in aerospace systems are not used. The main thing is that you don’t hear about a person with a wide forehead in this industry. Rogozin grabs too much, and with our cosmos he does not succeed, except for stating negative facts. The article by Alexander Knivel shows well the narrow interests of the leadership of departments working in this industry, who cannot rise to national ideas on the use of the existing backlog, on the development and application of space and aerospace systems.
        2. Scraptor
          Scraptor 31 January 2016 22: 28 New
          0
          And what side to my comment all your moonshine? Although of course "for" ...
    2. mahor
      mahor 31 January 2016 15: 07 New
      +3
      Quote: shirt
      It turns out that in vain we poher Burana sad

      Not us, but a Misha tagged ... am
      1. Wheel
        Wheel 31 January 2016 17: 47 New
        -1
        Quote: mahor
        Not us, but a Misha tagged ...

        Not tagged Misha, but drunk Borya.
        And the two ready-made Energias perished under the collapsed shop already at the darkest.
        1. cormorant
          cormorant 31 January 2016 21: 04 New
          +1
          And the two ready-made Energias perished under the collapsed shop already at the darkest.
          Is Putin again to blame?
    3. mark1386
      mark1386 31 January 2016 21: 47 New
      +2
      apparently yes. Now, the Energy launch vehicle and the Buran spacecraft in the amount of 4 pieces would be welcome
    4. Zai pali
      Zai pali 5 February 2016 18: 18 New
      +1
      No, he is very dear. The materials are not the same. Fatigue, microcracks. And the accident is expensive, in every sense.
  2. TVM - 75
    TVM - 75 31 January 2016 06: 54 New
    +3
    Leads to sad thoughts. The teams of the country's leaders in recent years - Khrushchev, Brezhnev, Gorbachev, Yeltsin, because of their illiteracy, have seriously damaged the country's defense capability and economy. These are not the "cooks" who could run the state.
    1. Scraptor
      Scraptor 31 January 2016 07: 20 New
      +2
      Why immediately because of illiteracy? bully
  3. chelovektapok
    chelovektapok 31 January 2016 07: 05 New
    +2
    It's easy to break ... To catch up is much worse. It's too early to bury the Russian Space! While the Americans cannot do without our engines, the French are putting their electronics into orbit with our rockets. Let's play. The situation is clear to the country's leadership. It would be all bad - would not press us with sanctions and generally would not hysterical West in Russophobia. That's when the "partners" begin to praise, as in the case of a marked Jew and a drunkard, then really the kirdyk looms close. Do not count your chickens before they are hatched! Wait and see.
    Another thing is that it is necessary to develop international cooperation in space to the common benefit. Alone there is no one to achieve results not only in Russia.
  4. salamandra2826
    salamandra2826 31 January 2016 07: 11 New
    +3
    All the same, Lena didn’t put him in this row in vain.
    1. Wheel
      Wheel 31 January 2016 17: 49 New
      0
      Quote: salamandra2826
      All the same, Lena didn’t put him in this row in vain.

      Not in vain.
      You just need to strain your brains a bit and compare some interesting facts.
  5. Dimon19661
    Dimon19661 31 January 2016 07: 12 New
    13
    Admittedly, in space we are forever behind. For Americans, automatic station flights to the peripheral planets of the Solar System are becoming commonplace, two rovers are simultaneously working on Mars, there are orbiting telescopes. We have maximum delivery of cargo and crews to the ISS. And constant scandals about theft funds in Roscosmos (((
    1. blizart
      blizart 31 January 2016 07: 32 New
      +8
      Admittedly, in space we are forever behind
      Well, my friend, you will be twisted. There is nothing in the world forever. And with such a groundwork for space, like the Russians, your words sound absolutely ridiculous. I agree with you on one thing - the Russians need to get well. Right, Sharikov's words about "take away and divide" are heard in a completely different way than 20 years ago !? And here's another from me: "Take off and plant." - it's not bad too.
      1. Dimon19661
        Dimon19661 31 January 2016 09: 17 New
        +4
        I’m not your old friend and I was not going to make you laugh. What hurt ??? What are you talking about ??? Maybe it’s enough to throw hats ??? China is already circling us in space, at least you should first ask who has any success in space programs. To remove and land, who will plant the Gogo ??? There everything is one team. Remove the pink glasses.
        1. sabakina
          sabakina 31 January 2016 10: 00 New
          +9
          For Dimon19661
          Actually, the word "my friend" in Russian is a respectful address to the interlocutor.
          On this topic.
          I do not think that Tsiolkovsky, Korolev, Chelomei, Gagarin will be transferred to Russia.
          1. Forest
            Forest 31 January 2016 11: 45 New
            0
            You look at the results of the Unified State Examination for schoolchildren - just a bunch of uneducated imbeciles that you can’t even put in place.
            1. Vadim237
              Vadim237 31 January 2016 18: 52 New
              +8
              You do not rake everyone under one bucket - we have a lot of smart graduates.
          2. Greenwood
            Greenwood 31 January 2016 16: 08 New
            +5
            Quote: sabakina
            I do not think that Tsiolkovsky, Korolev, Chelomei, Gagarin will be transferred to Russia.
            Of course, they may not be translated, only now they are quickly relegated to work at the same NASA for good money, where they will do what they love, and not fight the Russian bureaucracy.
          3. Zai pali
            Zai pali 5 February 2016 18: 24 New
            0
            Call mother lol
        2. blizart
          blizart 31 January 2016 20: 20 New
          +2
          Quote: Dimon19661
          I’m not your old friend and I was not going to make you laugh. What hurt ??? What are you talking about ??? Maybe it’s enough to throw hats ??? China is already circling us in space, at least you should first ask who has any success in space programs. To remove and land, who will plant the Gogo ??? There everything is one team. Remove the pink glasses.

          The brow quite strained with humor. On the basis of love for the fatherland is not otherwise. Calm down blissful. There are successes. In particular, they have not beaten them for the duration of their stay. Well, this is so by the way, do not strain too much.
      2. Zai pali
        Zai pali 5 February 2016 18: 22 New
        +1
        And I feel sorry for Hubble. This is real knowledge of the cosmos.
    2. Scraptor
      Scraptor 31 January 2016 07: 37 New
      +1
      Yes, indeed, all this flew both to Mars and to Pluto on Russian engines (including plasma ones), and the main device in the rover is Russian. And the main block of the American segment of the ISS turns out to be Russian-made and launched ... Even in the autonomous X-37, automation from the Buran is used, without talking about the "amenities" and systems for docking to the ISS. laughing
      USSR you understand bad
      1. Dimon19661
        Dimon19661 31 January 2016 09: 18 New
        0
        Who told you such nonsense ???
        1. 11 black
          11 black 31 January 2016 11: 52 New
          +5
          Quote: Dimon19661
          Who told you such nonsense ???

          It’s true about plasma engines and spectrum analyzers, but about the development of space programs in Russia, well, we are planning to organize a base on the moon by 30 in the year, this is a lot, state. the program is still running (knock on wood smile)
          Here the main achievement is the flew heavy Angara A5, as prescribed, in the 2015 year.
          I could not resist not to lay out

          And about radio telescopes, in general, ridiculous attacks - let it be known to you that the world's largest orbiting radio telescope (Guinness record) "Spectr-R" is Russian, assembled and designed in Russia at NPO Lavochkin and has been operating in orbit since 2011, I advise you to inquire about the program Radioastron about this.
          1. Wheel
            Wheel 31 January 2016 19: 01 New
            +1
            Quote: 11 black
            Well, by the year 30 we are going to organize a base on the moon, this is a lot, state. the program is still running (knock on wood)
            Here the main achievement is the flew heavy Angara A5, as prescribed, in the 2015 year.


            What place is the hangar connected to the moon?
            If only PR.

            A5 - replacement for Proton
            A7 - replacement for Proton at start from Plesetsk. (stopped)


            In general, if you look impartially, the Angara is a purely sawn project designed for many decades.
            1. 11 black
              11 black 1 February 2016 18: 34 New
              0
              Quote: Wheel
              What place is the hangar connected to the moon?
              If only PR.

              Quote: Wheel
              A5 - replacement for Proton

              They asked themselves - they answered ...
              Quote: Wheel
              In general, if you look impartially, the Angara is a purely sawn project designed for many decades.

              And by what criteria did you come to this conclusion?
              I do not notice the signs of "sawing" Angara as the newest universal carrier of the light, heavy and super-heavy class, which will pave the way for Russia into space in modern history.
              What do you think the "sawniness" of the Hangar, for example, in contrast to the American Falcon? Or do you have a plan for another project, more efficient than Angara?
        2. The comment was deleted.
        3. Scraptor
          Scraptor 31 January 2016 18: 52 New
          +1
          Why didn’t I ask for the link? bully Too hard hit it all at once?
      2. Forest
        Forest 31 January 2016 11: 44 New
        -1
        Heavy carriers took off with American engines, now it makes no sense to drive huge rockets for a couple of tons. Russia did not participate in the creation of the rover. Our instruments were on a European probe.
        1. 11 black
          11 black 31 January 2016 14: 23 New
          +3
          Quote: Forest
          Heavy carriers took off with American engines

          The New Horizons probe took off on RD-180, the power source was plutonium purchased in Russia.
          The Curiosity probe took off on RD-180, the power source is again Russian plutonium. Moreover, it was the nuclear power source that made it possible to install many scientific instruments.
          Quote: Forest
          Russia did not participate in the creation of the rover. Our instruments were on a European probe.

          Wrong.
          Among other things, the Russian "DAN", an albedo neutron detector, has been installed at Curiosity. It was he who made it possible to detect water in the Martian soil.
          Link http://www.iki.rssi.ru/events/2011/iki_dan_launch.pdf
          Yes, and boosters on our engines were, and this is the heaviest version of the atlas hi
        2. The comment was deleted.
      3. ILDM1986
        ILDM1986 31 January 2016 12: 14 New
        +5
        and what will it be forever? The USSR has been gone for 25 years, and for 25 years, science and industry have only been ruined! be realistic, another 5 years will pass and our services in space exploration will no longer be needed. the lag in the electronics, metallurgy, engine manufacturing, etc., will be trite. And alone we will not pull space exploration, and it will not be necessary for our anarchocapitalists.
        1. mahor
          mahor 31 January 2016 15: 12 New
          0
          Quote: ILDM1986
          and what will it be forever? The USSR has been gone for 25 years, and for 25 years, science and industry have only been ruined! be realistic, another 5 years will pass and our services in space exploration will no longer be needed. the lag in the electronics, metallurgy, engine manufacturing, etc., will be trite. And alone we will not pull space exploration, and it will not be necessary for our anarchocapitalists.



          And we have nowhere to go, we have to work. Buran program has not been closed so far ... drinks
          1. Wheel
            Wheel 31 January 2016 19: 02 New
            +4
            Quote: mahor
            Buran program has not been closed so far ...

            Closed in 1993.
            1. Scraptor
              Scraptor 31 January 2016 21: 36 New
              0
              Actually, no ...
        2. Scraptor
          Scraptor 31 January 2016 18: 59 New
          +1
          The States probably helped a lot in launching Gagarin. But for Apollo, Soviet technology was transferred unmeasured, as on the ISS.
          Only one https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Dawn_(MKS_module) is worth it.
  6. sa-ag
    sa-ag 31 January 2016 09: 29 New
    +2
    The wings in orbit are beautiful in the pictures, but it’s overweight, extra energy, they are useless, and why is imagination limited to low orbits, but what about the rest of the solar system?
    1. Fat
      Fat 31 January 2016 10: 48 New
      0
      Quote: sa-ag
      The wings in orbit are beautiful in the pictures, but it’s overweight, extra energy, they are useless, and why is imagination limited to low orbits, but what about the rest of the solar system?

      The shuttle is just a variant of the earth-orbit-earth transport system that allows both to deliver the spacecraft into orbit, and to remove satellites from orbit. Simply - an orbital plane. Why does an airplane need wings?
      FANTASY is not limited to the region of low orbits, but in some cases "you walk wide - you will tear your pants". The solar system has been waiting for a man to enter space for tens of thousands of years, will wait another couple of decades hi
      1. sa-ag
        sa-ag 31 January 2016 11: 11 New
        +4
        Quote: Thick
        and take satellites from orbit.

        Why, it’s unreasonably expensive, it’s easier to burn it in the atmosphere, i.e. to lay the possibility of a vault from orbit if the main functionality has failed, and launching a satellite into orbit is easier with a disposable rocket and cheaper
        Quote: Thick
        The solar system has been waiting for man to go into space for tens of thousands of years, he will wait another couple of decades

        And what will change? Maybe an ideology that involves getting everything here and now? A famous question is being asked - why do we need this cosmos, what should we do there? Space is certainly the most aggressive environment towards man, but it is precisely this that gives mankind a challenge to overcome various harmful factors, thereby developing science, creating new industries, increasing the tax base, applying new technologies for earthly needs, creating new industries for production Consolidated goods using new technologies, filling the currency with commodity contents, reducing inflation, and ultimately improving the life of a person as a whole, and this is only the earthly part of this return. If we take extra-land, then there is a wide field for activity, partially solved in the form of radiation-resistant solid-state electronics, which allowed Curiosity on Mars to function for 12 years instead of the planned 90 days, why not create an automated production of precision instruments specifically for the needs of extra-earth, namely, in extra-earth, t .to. they become expensive on earth only due to overcoming the gravity well. Yes, they wrote a lot of things that can be done in conditions of low gravity, since Soviet times. A person goes to extraterrestrial life to expand the field of his activity, the result of which is to improve the life of the person himself - new knowledge - new materials - new technologies - new products for humans
        1. pimen
          pimen 31 January 2016 12: 44 New
          +1
          nevertheless, it seems that there is no alternative to wings in the foreseeable future for reentry vehicles; except for a parachute, well, or "gravity" if we can
  7. Old26
    Old26 31 January 2016 11: 50 New
    +5
    The fact that in cosmonautics we are now far from in the first place is no doubt. As well as the fact that the Russian land can and gives birth to the new Tsiolkovsky, Royal ...
    But alas, in astronautics, as in other areas, alas, it is not Tsiolkovsky and the Queens who rule. That was and is.
    Unlike our competitors, we sometimes do not have a coherent space program, where not only the "carrot" for those who will do it faster and better, but also the "stick" for those who treat their work as a feeding trough and for which the end result does not matter.
    it is nevertheless necessary to somehow change the entire system of contests and orders, otherwise we will always be in the role of catching up.
    And to hope that the Americans depend on us is rather silly. Americans are quite pragmatic people and perfectly understand when to buy and when to do their own. Everyone now likes to cite our RD-180 engine as an example. Yes, the Americans are buying it from us and are simultaneously working on several types of engines, which will surpass ours in terms of their performance characteristics. Of course, it would be possible to spend several times more dollars for them and make the engine conditionally in 3 years, but you can spend much less and do it in 5-7 years. And for this time to buy engines from Russia, by the way paying not so much. One engine costs EMNIP from 9 to 11 million. They bought 100 units, spent 1 billion dollars, which is less if they were in a hurry. And now they have bought 20 engines from us (not 100, as before, but 20). Each Atlas-5 has one engine. On average, there are 5 to 9 flights of this launch vehicle per year. That is, for 2-3 years it is enough for them. This means that by 2018-2019 they will have their own.
    We sometimes always refer to priority. But the priority is history, and the fact that we are behind now is a fact
  8. Awaz
    Awaz 31 January 2016 13: 44 New
    +5
    maybe it is certainly not all right in the Russian Cosmos. But I would not look so enthusiastic at the Americans. With all due respect to their work, there is a lot of PR and advertising. Yes, of course they have more opportunities, but I do not think that they are smarter than ours.
    Nevertheless, one should not forget that the absence of any breakthroughs is the merit of the difficult 90s, when much was destroyed, sold and sold. And even what is left allows you to work poorly poorly. If attention is paid to this area, there will be results. I watched the MIPT competition for space specialties -250 -280 points out of 300 possible ... Young people have an interest. So there will be a result
  9. Igor V
    Igor V 31 January 2016 14: 33 New
    0
    More and more convinced that the achievements of the USSR in space feed the whole world. Wherever you look, our achievements are everywhere, and the developers, probably, too.
  10. opus
    opus 31 January 2016 15: 25 New
    0
    Quote: Author
    It is impossible to immediately set the satellite to an inclination less than the latitude from which the launch is made. Even the Vostochny cosmodrome will not help here. The southernmost point of the Russian Federation is 41 ° 11'N. sh. And one of the most important for practical application of the orbits is geostationary, passing in the equatorial plane of the Earth (0 ° latitude)


    immediately yes. So what?








    Quote: Author
    Even the Vostochny cosmodrome will not help here. The southernmost point of the Russian Federation is 41 ° 11'N. sh. And one of the most important for practical application of orbits is geostationary, passing in the equatorial plane of the Earth (0 ° latitude).

    tell it
    Express-AM33 (Express) Launch vehicle Proton-M / Briz-M Launch pad Russia Baikonur Sq. 200/39

    Yamal-201 or Yamal-200 number 1 Booster Proton-K Launch Pad Kazakhstan Baikonur Sq. No. 81/23
    etc.




    1. opus
      opus 31 January 2016 15: 30 New
      +5
      Quote: Author
      Changing the mood is a very energy-consuming maneuver. So, for satellites in low orbit having an orbital speed of about 8 kilometers per second, changing the inclination by 45 degrees will require approximately the same energy (speed increment), as for launching into orbitsy - about 8 kilometers per second.

      Nonsense.
      Orbital mechanics and basic maneuvers

      Non-impulse maneuver means low thrust engine operation for a long time

      Impulses along the normal axis only affect to the inclination of the orbit and do not change either its shape or orientation *

      Pulses along the radial axis affect the orientation * and the shape of the orbit in its plane, but do not change the slope.

      same...

      Quote: Author
      System "Energy" - "Buran" in its capabilities significantly superior to the American "Space Shuttle"

      Generally pearl.
      1. The system "Energia" - "Buran" was not used for real launches (only two, in fact, test), to claim "superior" - blah blah blah
      2. Data is open: every launch of the Energy - Buran System was 70-90% more expensive than the American Space Shuttle (if you didn’t forget), at that rate, with the THIS economy and the technological base.
      3. The author is at least a little "thinking" ...
      - At the Space Shuttle, only the CHEAP main fuel tank burned out, all the remote controls, as well as the TRTR, were many times
      “Energy” - “Buran” EVERYTHING burned, including expensive marching engines.
      La-la about the "advantages" of idle talk. Our RD-170s simply did not fit into Buran in terms of dimensions, and the problem (and it is complicated) of supplying low-boiling fuel tanks to the shuttle's ODE was not solved either.
      - Americans due to the breadth of start-up have a benefit, compared with us, up to 15% Mon
      1. Proxima
        Proxima 1 February 2016 18: 56 New
        0
        Quote: opus
        Quote: Author
        Changing the mood is a very energy-consuming maneuver. So, for satellites in low orbit having an orbital speed of about 8 kilometers per second, changing the inclination by 45 degrees will require approximately the same energy (speed increment), as for launching into orbitsy - about 8 kilometers per second.

        Nonsense.
        Orbital mechanics and basic maneuvers

        You, as always, "shine with intelligence", dear. The author is ABSOLUTELY RIGHT !!! You just need to give some explanations. If we are talking about a circular orbit, then the spacecraft will require the same amount of energy, but only to change the inclination of the orbit not by 45 degrees, but by 60. Another thing is that the apparatus, if it has a powerful (chemical) engine, does not make such energy-consuming maneuvers will be. It will act as follows: it will turn the shape of its orbit from circular to elliptical and change its inclination at the apocenter of the orbit. Further, the apparatus changes back the elliptical orbit to the same circular one. AND EVERYTHING! But I repeat, only a device with a powerful engine is capable of this. Devices with electric propulsion engines are not able to do this, and it is beneficial for them to rotate the orbit only in the way described by the author. So, dear Opus, before you pass the verdict "BOTH" think, maybe your posts are nonsense? And I will repeat, as I wrote to you earlier: LEARN ASTRODYNAMICS, because ILLiteracy stinks from you for a kilometer!
        1. Falcon5555
          Falcon5555 6 February 2016 19: 22 New
          0
          Proxima:
          He will do the following: he will transform the shape of his orbit from circular to elliptical and in the apocenter of the orbit will change its inclination. Further, the device reverses the ellipse orbit into the same circular orbit. AND EVERYTHING!

          But would he not spend exactly the same amount of fuel as he would spend on a direct change in inclination by turning on the engines, in short, normal to the plane of the current orbit? To reach a long ellipse, it is necessary to develop almost a second cosmic velocity, i.e. add to about 8 km / s. Then you need to slightly change the direction of speed, when it is close to zero, and when the device falls back to the height of a low orbit and passes through the perigee of an elliptical orbit, it is necessary to extinguish the same 4 km / s. Total turns out to be the same 4 km / s (approximately).

          The author is certainly not right in that his example with the costs of changing the inclination of a low orbit is not related to the costs of changing the inclination when moving to a geostationary, very high orbit. In this case, you only need to add about 3-4 km / s to bring to a long elliptical orbit, which you still need to add, and then slightly adjust the direction and speed at its apogee.

          Opus comments are not always true, but not in this case.
          1. Proxima
            Proxima 7 February 2016 01: 50 New
            -1
            Quote: Falcon5555

            But would he not spend exactly the same amount of fuel as he would spend on a direct change in inclination by turning on the engines, in short, normal to the plane of the current orbit?

            Dear Falcon, I will try to explain to you in one post the basic principles of orbital maneuvers from the perspective of astrodynamics. If this does not work out, then do not blame me, I will find and discard the readable material on this issue. Let's start with the simplest. The device flies in a straight line at a speed of 8km / s. He needs to turn 180 degrees and fly later at the same speed. He will spend 2 times more energy than he spent before gaining speed of 8km / s. Move on. The device needs to be rotated 90 degrees. He will now spend energy exactly as much as he spent before. Now consider the option when the device flies at the same speed, but in a circular orbit. This energy will be enough for him to deploy the device not by 90, but only by 60 degrees. Why? Because, he no longer turns a straight line, but a plane, that is, he spends energy also on gravitational interaction with the Earth (for example). What do astroballistics do? On the contrary, they use gravity for the benefit of the apparatus. Orbital maneuvers are a special case of gravitational maneuvers. The following happens. The device at the same point in the orbit (future perigee) on each turn gives an impulse to accelerate. After several such turns, the orbit will resemble an elongated ellipse, with a point (perigee) as close to Earth and a point (apogee) as far from the Earth as possible. At the apogee, the speed of the apparatus is MINIMUM, at the perigee - MAXIMUM (the first Kepler's law). In order for the apparatus to accelerate - it does this sequentially at the perigee of the orbit (the Overt effect) - it is VERY ENERGY profitable. In order for the device to change the direction of the orbit, it is energetically beneficial for it when the speed of the device is MINIMUM, that is, at the apogee of the orbit.
            1. Proxima
              Proxima 7 February 2016 02: 10 New
              +1
              In the continuation of my post, I want to repeat that only vehicles with liquid propellant engines can perform such maneuvers. Devices with an ERE are not capable of this and do it in the way described by the author of the article. An example can be given. The Martian probe Surveyor, possessing only an EJE, was forced to "choose" such an energy-consuming maneuver, going over to the polar orbit of Mars. This transition lasted a whole year and a half! So, the author of the article is absolutely right, but Opus is not.
              1. Falcon5555
                Falcon5555 7 February 2016 21: 47 New
                +1
                Oh, here, I learned a lot of new words: "astrodynamics", "astroballistics". By the way, the latter was not found in Yandex, alas. So you have the opportunity to introduce this word into scientific circulation. They wrote this, and now Yandex is looking and will start giving a pointer to this page. I thought it was a physics section called "space flight mechanics". Well, let it be astro-cosmo-galactic-universal-whatever. Only according to ordinary mechanics, everything that you wrote about energy costs, turns, angles, planes, gravity, etc. is wrong for you.For example, when studying space maneuvers, they usually talk about a change (increment) in the characteristic velocity, and not about energy costs. which, according to classical science, depend on the mass of the apparatus, which usually itself changes over time. You still need to learn the exact sciences. I don’t remember about Kepler and Obert, and I’m too lazy to look, and it doesn’t matter, because it’s all calculated according to the classical mechanics of Newton. And the fact that the orbital plane (not the direction) is beneficial to change somewhere close to the apogee, when the speed is minimal, that's what I wrote to you. I don't want to be rude on the Internet, so I will refrain from evaluating all this. You should also refrain from evaluations. The opus posts are not always correct, but they are always interesting, and I don’t remember yours at all.
                1. Proxima
                  Proxima 8 February 2016 15: 26 New
                  0
                  Quote: Falcon5555
                  I don’t even remember about Kepler and Obert, too lazy to look, and it doesn’t matter, since it is all calculated according to Newton’s classical mechanics.

                  Are you not ashamed to flaunt your illiteracy? It is not necessary to look for an Oberth, but to know it by the teeth, and then sit down at the "Klava" and talk about such topics. The Aubert effect is the backbone of orbital and gravitational maneuvers, and Newton's celestial mechanics will only help you partly. Astrodynamics describes the physics of spacecraft flight. I generally keep quiet about Kepler's laws. Did you go to school? As for the subject of conversation, which was originally - find an article by professional physicists Igor Afanasyev and Dmitry Vorontsov "Gravitational maneuvers", there practically word for word, as this article describes the costly energy of the spacecraft's orbit rotation, which he performs in the "classical" way. I recommend that you read it with Opus. Maybe you will write less nonsense.
                  1. Falcon5555
                    Falcon5555 9 February 2016 13: 12 New
                    0
                    What a completely incomprehensible friend you are. They explained to you that you need to learn the exact sciences. Physics, math. Twice two and all that. Binomial theorem. It's too early for you to think about gravity. What class are you in? Go to classes, especially physics? Do not skip! By the way, you are also some kind of unkind. Opus explained to you that you should not tell him what to do, and then you won’t know where to go. So now what are you trying to convey to him through me? So I already learned two new words from you, and now what do you want me to learn some other new? It may turn out to be some kind of unpleasant, I fear. Opus is a well-read gentleman. I might even not want to know this word. Not good. This is very unkind of you. Or maybe you are a schizophrenic? They, too, are dull and unkind, and at a certain initial stage, some of them send opponents something to read when they have no arguments left in the argument. At this stage, they may still seem to be surrounding talented inventors, although they can no longer invent anything. And they all have enemies. Here I am your enemy, and opus, and Newton are not your friend. Here are just one Obert. Oh! - Overt. Obert is yes. If all this is so, fasten yourself. I will not say that we are with you, otherwise you will somehow not understand this metaphoric saying. In a particular case, it will probably be out of place. We are not afraid to suppose - with opus, we probably only share your genuine interest in outer space, but perhaps we have no more in common. And most importantly - do not worry. The satellites will fly away without you to where they need to, smart uncles will calculate everything as they should without you and without Obert, and you - take pills, go to an appointment, in a word, do everything that the doctor prescribed. Successes.
                    1. Proxima
                      Proxima 9 February 2016 14: 45 New
                      0
                      WHAT WAS IT?!? Yes, you dear - a cheap jogger! To troll, you also need intelligence, at least its rudiments. Yes, and you have some kind of fasting syllable like a hysterical woman. In essence of the discussion, do you have something to say or will you cover yourself with Opus as a fig leaf?
                      1. Falcon5555
                        Falcon5555 11 February 2016 20: 00 New
                        0
                        You do not worry so much. This was the answer to you, as you probably guessed. Do not worry. No one is hiding behind anyone or anything, except in your imagination. Your attending doctor must have guessed about your sexual deviations on various grounds, for example, if you named him, like here, a feminine name, but spoke about yourself with past tenses
                        kind, for some reason, masculine. Good luck on your hard and confusing path.
  11. Igor V
    Igor V 31 January 2016 16: 29 New
    +2
    I wanted to recall the Kourou space center in French Guiana. It was built, including ours, with the right to further use. The cosmodrome is located near the equator, so that the problems associated with latitude are resolved.
    1. opus
      opus 31 January 2016 19: 07 New
      +1
      Quote: Igor V
      I wanted to recall the Kourou space center in French Guiana. It was built, including ours, with the right to continue

      Guiana Space Center (Center spatial guyanais)
      It was built by the FRENCH since 1965, at the initiative of the French Space Agency (CNES). The first launch from the Kourou cosmodrome was carried out on April 9, 1968.

      In 1975, when the European Space Agency (ESA) was formed, the French government proposed that the ESA use the Kourou spaceport for European space programs. ESA OUR there didn’t smell
      ours supplied equipment for PC ELS (Ensemble de Lancement Soyouz) - LV middle class Soyuz-2.
      And there (on the hen) 3 more PCs: ELV (CECLES / ELA-1) - Vega light class LV, ELA-2 - Arian-4 medium-class launch vehicle (operation completed in 2003), ELA-3 - Arian heavy-class launch vehicle -5


      ESA Funds ELS PC for Unions.
      OUR THERE IS NOTHING (except for the pH that someone paid for)


      virtual tour of the Kourou spaceport, here:



      ELS PC for “Unions”, here:




      It is beneficial for us
      1. Igor V
        Igor V 31 January 2016 22: 31 New
        +1
        Somewhere in the early 2000s, I inherited a subscription to the Novosti Kosmonavtiki magazine (an acquaintance left for permanent residence and transferred the subscription to me). The construction of this cosmodrome was widely covered there, with the difficulties of air and sea transportation of goods, and the like. As far as I understood then, in fact, the cosmodrome was not there before us. By the way, Perminov was in command then. He did a lot to save the space industry. The fact that this is not advertised is not surprising, for example, the fact that Boeing fuselages are built from Russian titanium castings is also not said, and the Americans do not have such technology.
        1. opus
          opus 1 February 2016 13: 53 New
          0
          Quote: Igor V
          the cosmodrome was not there before us.

          I brought data and a virtual diorama.
          Everything is there. Where did your Araians start from?
          First launch from Kourou Cosmodrome was carried out on April 9, 1968.
          Since 1975, ESA has continued to fund two thirds of the annual budget of the spaceport, which goes to the ongoing flight maintenance and maintenance of the cosmodrome service at a modern level.



          Ariane 1, lightweight class, first successful launch on December 24, 1979,
          Arian-2, middle class, first successful launch on November 20, 1987 (first launch on May 30, 1986 failed)
          Arian-3, middle class, first successful launch on August 4, 1984,
          Arian-4, middle class, first successful launch on June 15, 1988,
          Arian-5, heavy class, the first successful launch on October 30, 1997 (the first launch on June 4, 1996 ended in failure).

          ... April 26, 2015 at 23:00 Moscow time launched the Ariane 5 launch vehicle with two orbital vehicles. Since 1979, this is the 222nd launch of an Arian family carrier

          The Union is only a small fraction (both in terms of costs, number of launches, and PN)
  12. Orionvit
    Orionvit 31 January 2016 21: 21 New
    +2
    Quote: Scraptor
    Why immediately because of illiteracy? bully

    Because of illiteracy. Why should all specialists have specialized higher education in their fields, but there is no politics? Why do politicians come from the street, and the same diplomats (international politicians) graduate from MGIMO? Who can say if a politician is a profession, vocation, job, or goal? Why do they even say about obviously illiterate politicians that they have made a career on the "political Olympus"? Why are not many people becoming great experts in their field, but anyone can be politicians? It turns out that all mediocrity that is not able to achieve something in this life with their work goes to politics. I'm not talking about the President of Russia, this is an exception, but how many random persons there are in Russian politics. Ukraine is generally an indicator of the level of education of a modern politician. It's the same in the west. And note that politicians are very rarely responsible for their decisions and actions, even for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people, at the very least risk their political career. Who's to say WHY?
  13. k174oun7
    k174oun7 1 February 2016 14: 13 New
    +1
    In the states, non-governmental campaigns are actively involved in space. Our space is still "state". Judging by the periodic scandals about the construction of Vostochny, private companies want to be engaged in the "development" of state funds, not space. We need laws and guarantees for those who will invest non-state funds in this business. However, no laws, no guarantees, and even more people are not visible. Probably there will be sometime.
  14. Falcon5555
    Falcon5555 1 February 2016 14: 30 New
    +1
    If at least a fraction of the money that had been released to the nanopurg for 10 years in all its forms and reincarnations (starting with Rusnano) was spent on an intelligent, small, fully reusable and cheap shuttle, then maybe we would already have it? ..
  15. Veteran2016
    Veteran2016 1 February 2016 19: 40 New
    +1
    It turns out that in the Soviet cosmonautics strange things happened. Here read the vocation B.E. Chertoka.
    http://s017.radikal.ru/i407/1602/fc/64ae370918fe.jpg
  16. Petersburger
    Petersburger 3 February 2016 11: 57 New
    +1
    The buranas were not the ones that we buried, but the American friends, by the hands of Gorbachev. Yes, and the airfield for them destroyed. All copper was stolen from there. Did not keep track of the head of TsENKI Swinorev.
  17. Fastenkov
    Fastenkov 8 February 2016 02: 36 New
    +1
    All these are particular problems. Lightning died long ago, and this is a fact. Buran is pride, but it WAS. Everything was. But the most important thing - has anyone seen the program for the development of space activities in relation to economic benefits? Or sections: "Scientific CD", "CD Competence" (exaggerating).
    No long-term economic analysis, no. There is desire and inertia. And also people cannot be fired, the management system cannot be changed either. Who would have blown .... There is no plan and no clear answer to the question "why"?
  18. vka
    vka 23 February 2016 17: 04 New
    -1
    we maydanut not - but anyway, with whatever pleasure, I would hang our chenush on the lampposts.
  19. Awaz
    Awaz 24 February 2016 15: 24 New
    +1
    The latest American mini-shuttle Dream Chaser, which is planned to be used as one of the means of delivery of cargo to the International Space Station, turned out to be copied from the Soviet unmanned orbital rocket plane BOR-4. This was reported with reference to NASA documents by The Washington Post.
  20. Awaz
    Awaz 24 February 2016 15: 26 New
    0
    in the last post of BOR6 there were also 5 and 4 and 3 and 2, but the American version